Defeating Death

[ub3rman123]

I don't think neurons ever self-destruct, but it you lose them, they're gone. They don't undergo mitosis nearly as often as other somatic cells. The only way one could regain them is with stems cells or some equivalent (Brain transplants sound like fun).

 

From what I've read in the zombie survival handbooks, the rest of the body is just a machine to protect the brain. So making that invincible is the first step.

[AncientSpaceAeon]

"Should humanity seek a cure for aging?"

Cure? Aging and death is not a disease, it's a natural thing. What I know is that when humans are trying to change a natural thing, it ends badly.

 

And why seek a cure for aging if more than 2 billion people are suffering in life? For them, death maybe the thing that may end their suffering. What am I seeking is how to die happily, and with minimal pain.

[Mr Ham]

"Should humanity seek a cure for aging?"

Cure? Aging and death is not a disease, it's a natural thing. What I know is that when humans are trying to change a natural thing, it ends badly.

Influenza is natural. Yet we try to combat that too. If a condition causes our body to function improperly, we call it a 'disease'. How is aging any different?

[Pyrosocial]

The world would over populate....

[Balagor]

Influenza is natural. Yet we try to combat that too. If a condition causes our body to function improperly, we call it a 'disease'. How is aging any different?

Influenza is a external virus that attacks your body and makes you ill. Some people can live a livetime without ever having a flu.

Aging is a natural cyclus your cells are undergoing. No one can avoid it.

[Zephyr2011]

@kidwithafro

 

The question of the poll asks if we should defeat the entire aging process and death from old age. To that I say hell no. However diminishing the cosmetic effects of aging I could care less but giving humans anything close to immortality like that is a bad idea. About the water hydra: They don't "age" in the conventional sense however they do die from old age. The cell cycle continues in the other cells but eventually apoptosis outpaces it as in everything and the hydra dies. They may not appear to change but they don't have eternal youth and live forever. So there's nothing immune to death from old age. Nor should there be. If someone decides that that's a good idea in my lifetime and makes a compound for it then I'll re-engineer the dinosaurs just to counteract it. (Which is feasible howevr terribly impracticle.)

[LHammonds]

Should humanity seek a cure for aging?

I think that is more of a question by individual...not for the entire species.

 

In regards to defeating death, I've already done that...like my father before me. It's called children. I think of them like this: My father was an alpha, my older brothers were betas and I was version 1.0. My children are version 1.1, 1.2 and 1.3. They are based on my code and will be raised with my values which were my fathers and in that, we live on through our children. Hopefully, we shed things we dislike / disapprove and ingrain them in our children to be even better than before (hence the version references).

 

Although, I am surprised nobody has mentioned Brooke Greenberg yet. She is 16 years old but still the size of an infant with the mental capacity of a toddler. It is unknown how long she will continue to be like this or the why / how this is even happening.

 

Although it would be interesting being able to live for a 1,000 years or more, I think if there came a time that this could happen, those that become "immortal" would also have to give up being able to have children to avoid overpopulation. However, even with that said, overpopulation will cure itself just the same as polluting the environment will cure itself. The Earth will not be destroyed by pollution, the people living on it will and the Earth will recover. :thumbsup:

 

LHammonds

[kidwitthafro]

Influenza is natural. Yet we try to combat that too. If a condition causes our body to function improperly, we call it a 'disease'. How is aging any different?

Influenza is a external virus that attacks your body and makes you ill. Some people can live a livetime without ever having a flu.

Aging is a natural cyclus your cells are undergoing. No one can avoid it.

 

what about the interplay between aging and free radicals? also, disease does not have to arise from an external factor, autoimmune diseases are an example of this.

 

 

@kidwithafro

 

The question of the poll asks if we should defeat the entire aging process and death from old age. To that I say hell no. However diminishing the cosmetic effects of aging I could care less but giving humans anything close to immortality like that is a bad idea. About the water hydra: They don't "age" in the conventional sense however they do die from old age. The cell cycle continues in the other cells but eventually apoptosis outpaces it as in everything and the hydra dies. They may not appear to change but they don't have eternal youth and live forever. So there's nothing immune to death from old age. Nor should there be. If someone decides that that's a good idea in my lifetime and makes a compound for it then I'll re-engineer the dinosaurs just to counteract it. (Which is feasible howevr terribly impracticle.)

 

On what grounds do you make this claim? It is my understanding that the very nature of not aging, is not having your cells being outpaced by apoptosis. They do die, but it is because of external factors. And where do you conclude that from there, "nothing is immune to old age" I don't follow. Also, dinosaurs don't stand a chance versus modern machinery. If anything you should re-engineer a disease such as the black plague.

[Zephyr2011]

@kidwithafro

 

The question of the poll asks if we should defeat the entire aging process and death from old age. To that I say hell no. However diminishing the cosmetic effects of aging I could care less but giving humans anything close to immortality like that is a bad idea. About the water hydra: They don't "age" in the conventional sense however they do die from old age. The cell cycle continues in the other cells but eventually apoptosis outpaces it as in everything and the hydra dies. They may not appear to change but they don't have eternal youth and live forever. So there's nothing immune to death from old age. Nor should there be. If someone decides that that's a good idea in my lifetime and makes a compound for it then I'll re-engineer the dinosaurs just to counteract it. (Which is feasible howevr terribly impracticle.)

 

On what grounds do you make this claim? It is my understanding that the very nature of not aging, is not having your cells being outpaced by apoptosis. They do die, but it is because of external factors. And where do you conclude that from there, "nothing is immune to old age" I don't follow. Also, dinosaurs don't stand a chance versus modern machinery. If anything you should re-engineer a disease such as the black plague.

 

First if you are to quote someone don't paraphrase them because it frankly destoyrs your own argument before it even begins. I said, and you'll see in the quote, "there's nothing immune to death from old age" not "nothing is immune to old age." Everything dies from old age eventually if something else doesn't get it before that. Furthermore Hydra have not been sufficiently studied to know they're lifespan when dieing of natural causes. They were studied for 4 years and there wasn't an increase in mortality that was apparently directly corralated to age. This is the longest major study of Hydras however it is quite feasible that they have a long lifespan. Tortoises for example can live for over a hundred years why not with a hydra? No ones payed enough attention to know when exactly they die of old age. They have fantastic regenerative properties and don't die they replace the cells that die of apoptosis very rapidly however we do not know if this regeneration would decline at some point or apoptosis catch up and kill it and when. And ALL CELLS suffer from apoptosis it's the PROGRAMMED DEATH of a cell. Aging is an abstract thought, if on argues that not aging is not having cells outpaced by apoptosis then how do you say aging is having your cell outpaced by apoptosis? Am I not aging even though I have yet to finish growing and go on the decline towards death? No, we do not have a set defnition of age established as of yet in this debate. The declination in old age of cell mitosis where apoptosis overcomes the speed at which the cells can undergo mitosis and divide (which has been declining slowly since approxomitely age 27) and the body begins to wither and die is roughly what you're referring to. Eventually your cells that appeared rapidly early on are destroyed by apoptosis, since they were all roughly from the same time, starting at about at the same time and that being a lot of cells in your body no longer dividing and your other cells will be unable to keep up the race against apoptosis.

 

Also, I know dinosaurs wouldn't be the most practicle thing in the world however I disagree with the modern machinery statement, life is tenacious, especially life that was around for millions upon millions of years that had to fight, tooth an claw to attain its stature as dominant species for longer than we could ever hope on this planet and evolved over those millions of years into the perfect creatures for what they needed to do. You might have a gun but try aiming very well when there's a velociraptor screeching towards you at cheetah speed about to jump and disembowl you with it's killing claw while it's forelimbs slash you to pieces. And it's two friends from either side charging as well. I don't think modern machinery is much use against pure terror, speed, and power. A tank would be helpful but you have finite fuel and finite ammo, you couldn't eradicate an army let alone an army of massive creatures like that, heck a Sauroposeidon could just step on your tank and crush the crew. And the black death wouldn't need to be re-engineered, just cultured enough to be in a feasible amount to kill off the planet. :thumbsup:

[kidwitthafro]

Should humanity seek a cure for aging?

I think that is more of a question by individual...not for the entire species.

 

In regards to defeating death, I've already done that...like my father before me. It's called children. I think of them like this: My father was an alpha, my older brothers were betas and I was version 1.0. My children are version 1.1, 1.2 and 1.3. They are based on my code and will be raised with my values which were my fathers and in that, we live on through our children. Hopefully, we shed things we dislike / disapprove and ingrain them in our children to be even better than before (hence the version references).

 

Although, I am surprised nobody has mentioned Brooke Greenberg yet. She is 16 years old but still the size of an infant with the mental capacity of a toddler. It is unknown how long she will continue to be like this or the why / how this is even happening.

 

Although it would be interesting being able to live for a 1,000 years or more, I think if there came a time that this could happen, those that become "immortal" would also have to give up being able to have children to avoid overpopulation. However, even with that said, overpopulation will cure itself just the same as polluting the environment will cure itself. The Earth will not be destroyed by pollution, the people living on it will and the Earth will recover. :thumbsup:

 

LHammonds

 

What a wise observation! But, is sexual reproduction the best way to do so? As we advance, perhaps we should re-think what it means to be human. I don't know much about parenting, being only 18 and not one myself, however; Instead of your grandchildren being a more advanced version of yourself why not you yourself? Also, not aging does not necessarily mean that we would be need to eliminate sexual reproduction. The water hydra (i seem to be talking about it alot XD) has been seen to sexually reproduce in harsh conditions. Really, all we'd need to do is solve the overpopulation issue. If it even becomes an issue. Solving the socio-economic crisis would likely do a number on overpopulation. We could extend into space perhaps?

 

Also, it should be optional for each person, however, i think something as grand as this, would take a joint-effort. I used "humanity" because i think something like this would take incentive on a massive scale. If i was unclear, i'm sorry. English is not my first language, im still working through the kinks.

 

On a side note, Imagine being able to converse with your great great grandfather! Surely that would give you the opportunity to grow even more. Or the benefits of having our greatest minds, continue to learn and build upon what they know without having to "respawn" through their children.

 

On the contrary, a more serious issue here, is the question of whether or not individuals have the capacity to build upon their fundamental values. Because now, we have the benefit of having new generations with different priorities. In a world where people don't age, would be experience cultural stagnation? Oh and thanks for pointing out broke greenburg. how fascinating.

 

@kidwithafro

 

The question of the poll asks if we should defeat the entire aging process and death from old age. To that I say hell no. However diminishing the cosmetic effects of aging I could care less but giving humans anything close to immortality like that is a bad idea. About the water hydra: They don't "age" in the conventional sense however they do die from old age. The cell cycle continues in the other cells but eventually apoptosis outpaces it as in everything and the hydra dies. They may not appear to change but they don't have eternal youth and live forever. So there's nothing immune to death from old age. Nor should there be. If someone decides that that's a good idea in my lifetime and makes a compound for it then I'll re-engineer the dinosaurs just to counteract it. (Which is feasible howevr terribly impracticle.)

 

On what grounds do you make this claim? It is my understanding that the very nature of not aging, is not having your cells being outpaced by apoptosis. They do die, but it is because of external factors. And where do you conclude that from there, "nothing is immune to old age" I don't follow. Also, dinosaurs don't stand a chance versus modern machinery. If anything you should re-engineer a disease such as the black plague.

 

First if you are to quote someone don't paraphrase them because it frankly destoyrs your own argument before it even begins. I said, and you'll see in the quote, "there's nothing immune to death from old age" not "nothing is immune to old age." Everything dies from old age eventually if something else doesn't get it before that. Furthermore Hydra have not been sufficiently studied to know they're lifespan when dieing of natural causes. They were studied for 4 years and there wasn't an increase in mortality that was apparently directly corralated to age. This is the longest major study of Hydras however it is quite feasible that they have a long lifespan. Tortoises for example can live for over a hundred years why not with a hydra? No ones payed enough attention to know when exactly they die of old age. They have fantastic regenerative properties and don't die they replace the cells that die of apoptosis very rapidly however we do not know if this regeneration would decline at some point or apoptosis catch up and kill it and when. And ALL CELLS suffer from apoptosis it's the PROGRAMMED DEATH of a cell. Aging is an abstract thought, if on argues that not aging is not having cells outpaced by apoptosis then how do you say aging is having your cell outpaced by apoptosis? Am I not aging even though I have yet to finish growing and go on the decline towards death? No, we do not have a set defnition of age established as of yet in this debate. The declination in old age of cell mitosis where apoptosis overcomes the speed at which the cells can undergo mitosis and divide (which has been declining slowly since approxomitely age 27) and the body begins to wither and die is roughly what you're referring to. Eventually your cells that appeared rapidly early on are destroyed by apoptosis, since they were all roughly from the same time, starting at about at the same time and that being a lot of cells in your body no longer dividing and your other cells will be unable to keep up the race against apoptosis.

 

Also, I know dinosaurs wouldn't be the most practicle thing in the world however I disagree with the modern machinery statement, life is tenacious, especially life that was around for millions upon millions of years that had to fight, tooth an claw to attain its stature as dominant species for longer than we could ever hope on this planet and evolved over those millions of years into the perfect creatures for what they needed to do. You might have a gun but try aiming very well when there's a velociraptor screeching towards you at cheetah speed about to jump and disembowl you with it's killing claw while it's forelimbs slash you to pieces. And it's two friends from either side charging as well. I don't think modern machinery is much use against pure terror, speed, and power. A tank would be helpful but you have finite fuel and finite ammo, you couldn't eradicate an army let alone an army of massive creatures like that, heck a Sauroposeidon could just step on your tank and crush the crew. And the black death wouldn't need to be re-engineered, just cultured enough to be in a feasible amount to kill off the planet. :thumbsup:

 

How does paraphrasing your argument destroy mine? the two arguments are separate. my argument is not based off of yours. if i misinterpreted yours, i am sorry. though in this case i feel like the distinction does not change my response. regarding "there's nothing immune to death from old age" -- as i said before, there may be: the water hydra! i believe the 4 years issue was well addressed in the study. it may not have been sufficiently studied to conclude beyond ALL doubt that the hydra does not age, however, there is more evidence for it not aging than for it aging. tortoises do not have the regenerative qualities of the hyrda. you have no evidence that the hydra is subject to death of old age in the sense that we are.

 

Additionally, "Old age" is not a scientifically recognized cause of death. In terms of medicine, most things (if not everything) is immune to death from old age.

 

also, not ALL cells undergo apoptosis. working neurons do not undergo apoptosis. cancer cells do not undergo apoptosis. Anyway, it does not matter. what does matter, is that EXCESSIVE apoptosis causes atrophy. Excessive apoptosis is what would be prevented, not apoptosis itself.

 

Your right about age being ambiguous. in the context of this argument, i was referring to "age" as organismal senescence:After a period of near perfect renewal (in humans, between 20 and 35 years of age), organismal senescence is the declining ability to respond to stress, increasing homeostatic imbalance and increased risk of disease. (accompanied by degenerative side effects) If i should further clarify or change this definition, please let me know :smile:

 

okay, guns maybe. but what about predator drones, fighter jets, and mortars? Yes, fuel is finite, but so is flesh. All we need to do is kill them before they reproduce. Also, we have medicine on our side, and may be able to engineer a disease to wipe them all out. Sterilize them perhaps? I assumed that the black plague had to be re-engineered to better deal with modern immunities, and the increased level of hygiene. Disease is harder to deal with than a wild beast. we have been taming beasts for centuries. I read somewhere that before the genocide native americans were close to domesticating the bear. We still have innumerable problems taming disease.